The first time I treated a patient with HIV I felt completely overwhelmed. I was concerned that I didn't know enough about the virus and that I was too ignorant of the pharmaceuticals to correctly prescribe an herbal formula. After doing a thorough intake and consulting with my supervisor my fears were relieved. I was advised to go back to the basic principle of diagnosis and to consider the imbalance in terms of Chinese medicine.
In a sense, this simplified my understanding of the disease. It also made treatment more approachable; we are not attempting to cure disease but to bring the body toward a state of balance. Excess patterns, such as heat, phlegm, or blood stasis, must be eliminated and the body must be strengthened and nourished.
While Western treatment of HIV/AIDS is still quite limited, I would never advise a patient to work solely with Chinese medicine. Thus far, we've not come up with any mono-therapy that will effectively treat the virus. What I dislike about the western treatment of HIV and AIDS is the same thing I dislike about cancer treatment [see below]. I firmly believe that TCM can not only strengthen our immune systems but also offer a different, more holistic perspective of healing and the body. We can use nutritional therapy and qi gong as a means of strengthening and balancing. Thus, we are not required to rely solely on non-participatory treatment, which I find empowering.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Monday, September 8, 2008
Understanding cancer
What I know of cancer is that it is a devastating disease that, apart from some known factors, is indiscriminate in it's host. I know that the treatment of cancer may vary radically depending on one's means, awareness, general health, age and many other factors.
I think that what many find frightening about cancer is how little we know about it. How do we prevent an idiopathic disease? Sure, there are things that we know. We know for a fact that tobacco use causes cancer. We know that some strains of Human Papilloma Virus may lead to cancer and that severe burns may lead to skin cancer. It's possible that regular cell phone use will cause cancer; or pesticides or excessive estrogen in the form of oral contraceptives. It's also possible that these things will not cause cancer.
Then there are things that we are certain about; we have tools to fight cancer under the correct circumstances and sometimes they are effective.
In a sense, we are obligated to live in the unknown. There are prophylactic measures to be taken, but even this seems like guesswork. For instance, "the National Cancer Institute recommends a diet with large amounts of colorful fruits and vegetables. These foods supply ample amounts of Vitamin A, C, and E, as well as phytochemicals and other antioxidants that help to prevent cancer. There is strong evidence that a diet rich in vegetables and fruits will not only reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes, but will also protect against cancer."
But then again, there was a study [aren't these our primary means of determining data?] among women with breast cancer in California a couple of years back that determined that there was not relationship between tumor growth and fruit and vegetable consumption. Again, we are working with a lack of certainty.
With respect to the treatment of cancer, TCM is necessarily going to approach cancer differently than the western model by virtue of the fact that TCM treats disease differently. TCM views the body as a living system that requires a state of balance; a deficiency of the spleen impacts the state of the liver. While TCM views disease as a pattern [affecting the system], western medicine breaks disease down to it's smallest particle to contain or eliminate.
Another primary difference in terms of treatment is the emphasis in TCM on strengthening the body in order to heal. I have a friend who was diagnosed with lung cancer a couple of months ago. She is 35 years old and vital. Her prognosis was grim; six months to a year at best. She has been undergoing chemotherapy as well as using chinese medicine. In the last month, her white blood cells and neutrophils have been too low to receive chemo and so she's been resting and taking potent doses of deer antler, or lu rong. Lu rong has the function of tonifying the kidneys and fortifying the yang, warming the yang and regulating the Ren and Chong vessels, tonifying the Du, augmenting the essence and blood, and strengthening sinews and bones. It also tonifies and nourishes qi and blood. After a month of taking lu rong, Valerie is stronger and able to receive her last few rounds of chemo.
This to me, is a fine example of integrating eastern and western medicine. They function quite differently, and in the case of a chronic disease such as cancer, may complement one another well. In an ideal world, we would work almost entirely with preventative health, and process' such as chemotherapy would be unnecessary. But that's not where we are today. For now what we can do is start where we are.
I think that what many find frightening about cancer is how little we know about it. How do we prevent an idiopathic disease? Sure, there are things that we know. We know for a fact that tobacco use causes cancer. We know that some strains of Human Papilloma Virus may lead to cancer and that severe burns may lead to skin cancer. It's possible that regular cell phone use will cause cancer; or pesticides or excessive estrogen in the form of oral contraceptives. It's also possible that these things will not cause cancer.
Then there are things that we are certain about; we have tools to fight cancer under the correct circumstances and sometimes they are effective.
In a sense, we are obligated to live in the unknown. There are prophylactic measures to be taken, but even this seems like guesswork. For instance, "the National Cancer Institute recommends a diet with large amounts of colorful fruits and vegetables. These foods supply ample amounts of Vitamin A, C, and E, as well as phytochemicals and other antioxidants that help to prevent cancer. There is strong evidence that a diet rich in vegetables and fruits will not only reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes, but will also protect against cancer."
But then again, there was a study [aren't these our primary means of determining data?] among women with breast cancer in California a couple of years back that determined that there was not relationship between tumor growth and fruit and vegetable consumption. Again, we are working with a lack of certainty.
With respect to the treatment of cancer, TCM is necessarily going to approach cancer differently than the western model by virtue of the fact that TCM treats disease differently. TCM views the body as a living system that requires a state of balance; a deficiency of the spleen impacts the state of the liver. While TCM views disease as a pattern [affecting the system], western medicine breaks disease down to it's smallest particle to contain or eliminate.
Another primary difference in terms of treatment is the emphasis in TCM on strengthening the body in order to heal. I have a friend who was diagnosed with lung cancer a couple of months ago. She is 35 years old and vital. Her prognosis was grim; six months to a year at best. She has been undergoing chemotherapy as well as using chinese medicine. In the last month, her white blood cells and neutrophils have been too low to receive chemo and so she's been resting and taking potent doses of deer antler, or lu rong. Lu rong has the function of tonifying the kidneys and fortifying the yang, warming the yang and regulating the Ren and Chong vessels, tonifying the Du, augmenting the essence and blood, and strengthening sinews and bones. It also tonifies and nourishes qi and blood. After a month of taking lu rong, Valerie is stronger and able to receive her last few rounds of chemo.
This to me, is a fine example of integrating eastern and western medicine. They function quite differently, and in the case of a chronic disease such as cancer, may complement one another well. In an ideal world, we would work almost entirely with preventative health, and process' such as chemotherapy would be unnecessary. But that's not where we are today. For now what we can do is start where we are.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Carbon offsets
I suppose the question of efficacy depends upon the desired outcome. If what is intended has to do with reducing carbon emissions, then this is a small step indeed. But I'm of the mind that every small step that makes us aware of our impact is useful.
As far as increasing air passenger duty, while this may be effective should the funds go to the correct environmental agency, I'm not convinced that this would have any effect on consciousness raising. I'm more inclined to believe that it would simply be another fee tacked onto an already steep bill and I, for one, would have very little awareness of what I was paying for.
Along these same lines, would it not be taxpayers that would absorb the cost of minister's or civil servants wandering around the world? Again, "effective" depends upon expectation. Perhaps if tax payers were aware of a significant cost they would discourage government from traveling abroad with such frequency, and perhaps this would do more in the long term than an environmental fund in the short term.
As evidence to a citizen's ignorance regarding taxation, I wonder what became of this program. I wonder if this is something we've adopted or whether there's some variation that's been implemented here. I am certainly remiss in my democratic duties regarding the destination of my tax money. For that matter, I've not once pored over an airline bill to determine what fees are paid to whom.
A similar consideration would be tacking this type of fee onto gasoline costs in urban areas, provided that public transportation is a reasonable alternative. The city of San Francisco has raised parking fines for more congested areas to reduce traffic as well as continuing to raise bridge tolls. This is the type of change that I would find most effective, in particular concurrent with reducing costs of public transportation systems. In this way individuals are encouraged to consider our impact and make every day choices in the direction of sustainability.
As far as increasing air passenger duty, while this may be effective should the funds go to the correct environmental agency, I'm not convinced that this would have any effect on consciousness raising. I'm more inclined to believe that it would simply be another fee tacked onto an already steep bill and I, for one, would have very little awareness of what I was paying for.
Along these same lines, would it not be taxpayers that would absorb the cost of minister's or civil servants wandering around the world? Again, "effective" depends upon expectation. Perhaps if tax payers were aware of a significant cost they would discourage government from traveling abroad with such frequency, and perhaps this would do more in the long term than an environmental fund in the short term.
As evidence to a citizen's ignorance regarding taxation, I wonder what became of this program. I wonder if this is something we've adopted or whether there's some variation that's been implemented here. I am certainly remiss in my democratic duties regarding the destination of my tax money. For that matter, I've not once pored over an airline bill to determine what fees are paid to whom.
A similar consideration would be tacking this type of fee onto gasoline costs in urban areas, provided that public transportation is a reasonable alternative. The city of San Francisco has raised parking fines for more congested areas to reduce traffic as well as continuing to raise bridge tolls. This is the type of change that I would find most effective, in particular concurrent with reducing costs of public transportation systems. In this way individuals are encouraged to consider our impact and make every day choices in the direction of sustainability.
the healing power of laughter
Of course laughter is the best medicine. We've all had the experience of genuine, gut wrenching laughter that changes, if momentarily, our world view. I find it not at all surprising that studies would indicate changes in neuro-endocrine response and am pleased to know that MD's may, now that it's been scientifically proven, recommend it as a means to wellness.
One arena in which I find laughter especially useful is in my ability to laugh at myself. That is, to not take myself so seriously, either in stress levels, success, or woes. Taking a step back from the momentous circumstances of my life always illuminates the reality of the situation in a way that promotes humor [and wellness].
One arena in which I find laughter especially useful is in my ability to laugh at myself. That is, to not take myself so seriously, either in stress levels, success, or woes. Taking a step back from the momentous circumstances of my life always illuminates the reality of the situation in a way that promotes humor [and wellness].
Friday, September 5, 2008
Food crisis
I feel ill equipped to offer solution to the global crisis in diet. Perhaps the first question is, what precisely is the crisis? If we are referring solely to the health crisis- rising rates of obesity, heart disease, cancer and diabetes- then the food crisis must be dealt with on several levels.
Certainly major food corporations should be accountable and take responsibility for what we are being fed [both in terms of nutrition and advertisement], but it seems to me that there are root issues that ought to be addressed as well. First, who is subsidizing the food products that are making us ill? Michael Pollan addresses government subsidies and our dependence on corn in The Omnivores Dilemma, and in numerous articles in The New York Times Magaizine.
Also, I would argue that the ability to be healthy is directly related to socio-economic status. In other words, it is a privilege to be healthy, to have access to nutritious foods, to have the time to prepare and to eat them.
Finally, what about health care? Sure, we would be better served to address our health/diet crisis through preventative measures- ie. providing the necessary resources for nutritional wellness. But since we're not there, part of coping with a global crisis in diet [obesity, heart disease, cancer and diabetes], entails addressing who has access to health care. I've written more about this in a paper on obesity and health care and will send it along soon.
Certainly major food corporations should be accountable and take responsibility for what we are being fed [both in terms of nutrition and advertisement], but it seems to me that there are root issues that ought to be addressed as well. First, who is subsidizing the food products that are making us ill? Michael Pollan addresses government subsidies and our dependence on corn in The Omnivores Dilemma, and in numerous articles in The New York Times Magaizine.
Also, I would argue that the ability to be healthy is directly related to socio-economic status. In other words, it is a privilege to be healthy, to have access to nutritious foods, to have the time to prepare and to eat them.
Finally, what about health care? Sure, we would be better served to address our health/diet crisis through preventative measures- ie. providing the necessary resources for nutritional wellness. But since we're not there, part of coping with a global crisis in diet [obesity, heart disease, cancer and diabetes], entails addressing who has access to health care. I've written more about this in a paper on obesity and health care and will send it along soon.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Chimps make spears, humans make guns
Sometimes I wonder what war was like a thousand years ago. Even a hundred years ago, I believe it was a different business. It is not my intention to glorify war in any form; after all, aren't we all participating in small ways every day? Certainly the business of fighting has evolved over time; as we learn to kill people with more expansive and less personal means the stakes are heightened irrevocably.
I suppose I thought it an established fact that we'd evolved from chimps and that we carried with us a predisposition for self preservation and protection of our young. I find it curious that these "female traits" ["efficient and innovative, problem solvers, curious] are thought to evolve along the lines of gender. I wonder whether this is stated as a simple fact or in relation to male chimps.
I suppose I thought it an established fact that we'd evolved from chimps and that we carried with us a predisposition for self preservation and protection of our young. I find it curious that these "female traits" ["efficient and innovative, problem solvers, curious] are thought to evolve along the lines of gender. I wonder whether this is stated as a simple fact or in relation to male chimps.
Giant toads and colossal squid
I wonder whether these giant toads have posed a threat in their native Hawaii. This makes me think of McPhee's The Control of Nature- why is it so difficult for us to acknowledge that we don't always know what's best.
As for the colossal squid, just another indication that our awareness is quite limited. I hate to present a bleak perspective, but it seems that in our effort to control and anthropomorphize we lose a sense of the vastness of life. While the "agressive killer" and "poisonous species" certainly sound ominous, they may also be regarded as elements of a fine balance.
As for the colossal squid, just another indication that our awareness is quite limited. I hate to present a bleak perspective, but it seems that in our effort to control and anthropomorphize we lose a sense of the vastness of life. While the "agressive killer" and "poisonous species" certainly sound ominous, they may also be regarded as elements of a fine balance.
immunizations
Immunizations are a tricky business. They are, in many cases, useful and so I'm inclined to say that perhaps they ought to be compulsory. However, in the end my skepticism gets the best of me. I don't have enough confidence in the powers that be to put anyone, let alone a child, in the position of compulsory immunizations.
Yes, I believe that parents ought to take an active role in designing their children's immunizations schedule. But I also don't think that the onus should be put solely on parents at this stage in the game. Is the public given adequate and accessible information about vaccines?
Optimally, parents would have a trusted doctor to advise them, or at least to offer resources that would be useful. I have a friend who's pediatrician advised her that she would be putting her child at risk if she didn't give her a Hep B vaccine at 6 months. When she asked how the doctor thought she might be at risk for Hep B, the doctor retracted the urgency of his assessment.
Still, I don't think there's a clear answer here. I think that we often make decisions from a place of fear with regards to the health of our children. Yet, I also understand the gravity of this decision and I believe these are decisions that should be considered from a communal and universal perspective rather than personally.
Yes, I believe that parents ought to take an active role in designing their children's immunizations schedule. But I also don't think that the onus should be put solely on parents at this stage in the game. Is the public given adequate and accessible information about vaccines?
Optimally, parents would have a trusted doctor to advise them, or at least to offer resources that would be useful. I have a friend who's pediatrician advised her that she would be putting her child at risk if she didn't give her a Hep B vaccine at 6 months. When she asked how the doctor thought she might be at risk for Hep B, the doctor retracted the urgency of his assessment.
Still, I don't think there's a clear answer here. I think that we often make decisions from a place of fear with regards to the health of our children. Yet, I also understand the gravity of this decision and I believe these are decisions that should be considered from a communal and universal perspective rather than personally.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Eat your broccoli, and eggs, and beets.
I tend to find myself a bit wary whenever I read, "New study says that X prevents cancer," or what have you. After all, we aren't so sure yet why we're getting cancer and so how can we determine preventative measures. Perhaps this is also a knee jerk response to the sources that direct us each season toward a solution to our health woes and away from that primary issue that has finally been isolated. First beef and butter and eggs; later breads and pastas, and then we should all be eating raw food.
That said, when the recommendation is eat more plentiful servings of vegetables, by all means. Let me stress, too, that I am by no means diminishing the science that has established a link between BRCA genes and broccoli [and cauliflower and cabbage]. But what if some day we find that our cancer is directly related to our stress? In that case perhaps the finest prophylactic measure is to eat a balanced, moderate diet and thoroughly enjoy our food.
Furthermore, we have this tendency to break things down to their smallest particle in order to establish efficacy. While this may be a useful tool, I think it's erroneous to assume that I3C will have the same effect once removed from broccoli, or maybe it's effect will be minimized by the use of a given insecticidal. All of this to say that we just don't know and isn't that sometimes acceptable?
That said, when the recommendation is eat more plentiful servings of vegetables, by all means. Let me stress, too, that I am by no means diminishing the science that has established a link between BRCA genes and broccoli [and cauliflower and cabbage]. But what if some day we find that our cancer is directly related to our stress? In that case perhaps the finest prophylactic measure is to eat a balanced, moderate diet and thoroughly enjoy our food.
Furthermore, we have this tendency to break things down to their smallest particle in order to establish efficacy. While this may be a useful tool, I think it's erroneous to assume that I3C will have the same effect once removed from broccoli, or maybe it's effect will be minimized by the use of a given insecticidal. All of this to say that we just don't know and isn't that sometimes acceptable?
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Living Systems
The fact of our constant movement, formation and transformation, and the reliance of sun, air, water, etc. in this process is indication of our presence within this system and classification as living.
That which is not living is not contingent upon environmental factors for sustenance, indeed does not require sustenance. Is it our reliance on our atmosphere that distinguishes us as alive? Living systems require constant exchange and engagement with those basic elements that support us. We seem to be slightly misguided in our identification as separate entities capable of thriving independently; rather we (living systems) are in constant relationship with every other living particle.
That which is not living is not contingent upon environmental factors for sustenance, indeed does not require sustenance. Is it our reliance on our atmosphere that distinguishes us as alive? Living systems require constant exchange and engagement with those basic elements that support us. We seem to be slightly misguided in our identification as separate entities capable of thriving independently; rather we (living systems) are in constant relationship with every other living particle.
Divergence of species
I'll be honest: I don't fully understand the process of a species diverging or the development of a sub-species. In this particular instance isn't it possible that the introduction of a single random element could be the determining factor? I'm also curious about external influences such as environmental or geographical shifts. There's obviously a great deal more for me to consider here.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
inundated with drugs
Yeah, there's a drug around for nearly everything and it's tough to consider how reliant we seem to have become on meds. Perhaps it should be instructive that the prosperous among us are not exempt, in fact, may well be more inclined to medicate.
The good news (in a manner of speaking) is that we can't afford them. Short of a radical change in health care and the pharmaceutical industry, it seems to me that we have little choice but to move in the direction of preventative health care. This bodes well for those of us intending to eke out a living as TCM practitioners.
The good news (in a manner of speaking) is that we can't afford them. Short of a radical change in health care and the pharmaceutical industry, it seems to me that we have little choice but to move in the direction of preventative health care. This bodes well for those of us intending to eke out a living as TCM practitioners.
genetic evolution
The fact that most of our critical DNA is identical to that of chimps is not particularly surprising. On the contrary, I'm surprised that we human beings are so determined to emphasize our distinctions from one another. It's comical, given our genetic similarity to chimps, that we should ever have considered that there may be sub species among human beings.
Then again, I wonder what difference it ultimately makes whether chimps are classified under the "homo" or "Pan" genus. If reclassification could as Rambaut suggests, "raise the chimps profile and improve their conservation," then by all means, reclassify. But shouldn't that be indicative of our own arrogance that a species should fare better under the classification homo genus?
Then again, I wonder what difference it ultimately makes whether chimps are classified under the "homo" or "Pan" genus. If reclassification could as Rambaut suggests, "raise the chimps profile and improve their conservation," then by all means, reclassify. But shouldn't that be indicative of our own arrogance that a species should fare better under the classification homo genus?
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Does Darwinism matter?
On Tuesday the Board of Education in Florida adopted a curriculum change that will force public schools to refer to evolution as "a scientific theory." Nearly 200 years after the birth of Charles Darwin, teachers in Florida will be required to acknowledge the legitimacy of evolution as a scientific theory.
In 2005 a federal court declared that intelligent design, previously considered a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory, was in fact a religion rather than science. But it doesn't seem that the case (Kitzmiller v. Dover) made specific requirements as to what must be taught. Thus, schools in Texas, Florida and Arkansas have simply opted to refer to evolution as one theory, among other alternatives.
I have to admit, I'm a bit awed that this is a debate that persists within American public schools in 2008. Then again, it turns out that Romney, Thompson and Huckabee believe in Creationism and deem it worthy of note in scientific discourse. I suppose it is to some degree our inclination to impose a tenet so central to a persons world view on most aspects of experience. Still, I find myself far more comfortable with Nancy Pearcey's assessment of the implications of Darwinism.
In 2005 a federal court declared that intelligent design, previously considered a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory, was in fact a religion rather than science. But it doesn't seem that the case (Kitzmiller v. Dover) made specific requirements as to what must be taught. Thus, schools in Texas, Florida and Arkansas have simply opted to refer to evolution as one theory, among other alternatives.
I have to admit, I'm a bit awed that this is a debate that persists within American public schools in 2008. Then again, it turns out that Romney, Thompson and Huckabee believe in Creationism and deem it worthy of note in scientific discourse. I suppose it is to some degree our inclination to impose a tenet so central to a persons world view on most aspects of experience. Still, I find myself far more comfortable with Nancy Pearcey's assessment of the implications of Darwinism.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Evolution of the Holstein
Alright, now here's a subject that bears investigation. Or rather, wouldn't it be prudent to use science (and history) to our advantage once we understand something about the process of evolution?
There's an article in this weeks New York Times Magazine called, A Dying Breed: A Cautionary Tale of Well-Intentioned Development by a fellow named Andrew Rice. It chronicles Uganda's transition from the Longhorn Ankole cow to the American Holstein, and ultimately, the potential loss of genetic variation in African cattle.
The Holstein is capable of providing 20-30 times as much milk as an African Ankole, which is significant given the level of poverty affecting Uganda. But the Holstein doesn't deal well with heat, while the Ankole has long horns that function to disperse excess body heat. Other traits specific to Holsteins are that they are commonly ill and require imported medicine (we tend to deal with this by pumping cattle with preventative antibiotics) and they consume more resources than will be ultimately sustainable. In contrast, the Ankole is resistant to far more strains of disease and is capable of sustaining a draught, but will not produce the quantity of milk that a farmer needs to prosper.
In other words, while this transition allows many Ugandan's to thrive in the short term, becoming reliant on a livelihood that's unsustainable will put the country in a precarious position. And many of the tribes in Uganda are lactose intolerant. The other side of this dilemma is that the Holstein has brought resources to an impoverished country. Rice acknowledges that, "An estimated 70 percent of the world's rural poor, some 630 million people, derive a substantial percentage of their income from livestock. Increase the productivity of these animals...and you improve dire living standards."
The risk here is the extinction of livestock breeds that have evolved to thrive in this particular ecosystem. "The Food and Agriculture Organization...recently reported that at least 20 percent of the world's estimated 7,600 livestock breeds are in danger of extinction. Experts are warning of a potential meltdown in global genetic diversity."
This loss of genetic diversity in this context seems like a catastrophe on par with the Irish Potato Famine. The difference, of course, is that we know quite a bit more about the repercussions of our actions and proceed in a seemingly reckless fashion.
Here's a link, in case this has generated any interest.
www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/magazine/27cow-t.html
There's an article in this weeks New York Times Magazine called, A Dying Breed: A Cautionary Tale of Well-Intentioned Development by a fellow named Andrew Rice. It chronicles Uganda's transition from the Longhorn Ankole cow to the American Holstein, and ultimately, the potential loss of genetic variation in African cattle.
The Holstein is capable of providing 20-30 times as much milk as an African Ankole, which is significant given the level of poverty affecting Uganda. But the Holstein doesn't deal well with heat, while the Ankole has long horns that function to disperse excess body heat. Other traits specific to Holsteins are that they are commonly ill and require imported medicine (we tend to deal with this by pumping cattle with preventative antibiotics) and they consume more resources than will be ultimately sustainable. In contrast, the Ankole is resistant to far more strains of disease and is capable of sustaining a draught, but will not produce the quantity of milk that a farmer needs to prosper.
In other words, while this transition allows many Ugandan's to thrive in the short term, becoming reliant on a livelihood that's unsustainable will put the country in a precarious position. And many of the tribes in Uganda are lactose intolerant. The other side of this dilemma is that the Holstein has brought resources to an impoverished country. Rice acknowledges that, "An estimated 70 percent of the world's rural poor, some 630 million people, derive a substantial percentage of their income from livestock. Increase the productivity of these animals...and you improve dire living standards."
The risk here is the extinction of livestock breeds that have evolved to thrive in this particular ecosystem. "The Food and Agriculture Organization...recently reported that at least 20 percent of the world's estimated 7,600 livestock breeds are in danger of extinction. Experts are warning of a potential meltdown in global genetic diversity."
This loss of genetic diversity in this context seems like a catastrophe on par with the Irish Potato Famine. The difference, of course, is that we know quite a bit more about the repercussions of our actions and proceed in a seemingly reckless fashion.
Here's a link, in case this has generated any interest.
www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/magazine/27cow-t.html
the human yawn: empathy or ennui?
Alright, so human beings are empathetic. Do we really need a study to break it down for us? Really; sure it's interesting to consider, but ultimately, is this information going to alter anyone's reality? Sometimes I wonder how much money goes into this type of study.
On an unrelated note, it seems to me that those of us with canine companions may dispute the assertion that, "humans, uniquely, are able to imagine what someone else is thinking or feeling." Then again, can I provide evidence that my dog is aware of my emotional landscape? No, but I'm not sure that our relationship bears investigation.
On an unrelated note, it seems to me that those of us with canine companions may dispute the assertion that, "humans, uniquely, are able to imagine what someone else is thinking or feeling." Then again, can I provide evidence that my dog is aware of my emotional landscape? No, but I'm not sure that our relationship bears investigation.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Introductory remarks
Apologies for showing up so late in the game in the realm of blogging. This is an exercise that I undertake with great ambivalence, though in the context of this class it seems not only practical but a fine form of engagement.
My name is Emily Hooker. I've just begun my third year here at AIMC and continue to be pleased with my rather gentle transition into the world of TCM and, in particular, integrative medicine. I'll confess that in my first year or so here at AIMC I spent no small amount of time wondering what exactly the school meant by integrative medicine curricula or integrative medicine clinic. I knew coming in that I wanted to understand how to relate TCM to our understanding of disease and health, which is pretty well steeped in western medicine. But I didn't fully grasp how AIMC intended to integrate these two forms of medicine clinically or theoretically. This has changed for me some with the recent advent of the integrative medicine series and a bit of clinical experience. I find that one rather seemingly simple, yet integral, dimension of my learning has to do with language. Yes, there's a lot that I don't know about medicine, eastern and western. But a common cold is not a different malady in Chinese medicine than we've understood it to be experientially. What's different is the way that we relate to it, treat it and talk about it.
For someone with little prior experience in either form of medicine, this integration business can be a daunting proposition. But I find that the more I know the more I want to know. So it seems fitting, if negligent, that I wound up taking this course in my third year here at AIMC. I look forward to the perspectives that Larry has to offer, and a fuller understanding of the fundamentals of biology.
My name is Emily Hooker. I've just begun my third year here at AIMC and continue to be pleased with my rather gentle transition into the world of TCM and, in particular, integrative medicine. I'll confess that in my first year or so here at AIMC I spent no small amount of time wondering what exactly the school meant by integrative medicine curricula or integrative medicine clinic. I knew coming in that I wanted to understand how to relate TCM to our understanding of disease and health, which is pretty well steeped in western medicine. But I didn't fully grasp how AIMC intended to integrate these two forms of medicine clinically or theoretically. This has changed for me some with the recent advent of the integrative medicine series and a bit of clinical experience. I find that one rather seemingly simple, yet integral, dimension of my learning has to do with language. Yes, there's a lot that I don't know about medicine, eastern and western. But a common cold is not a different malady in Chinese medicine than we've understood it to be experientially. What's different is the way that we relate to it, treat it and talk about it.
For someone with little prior experience in either form of medicine, this integration business can be a daunting proposition. But I find that the more I know the more I want to know. So it seems fitting, if negligent, that I wound up taking this course in my third year here at AIMC. I look forward to the perspectives that Larry has to offer, and a fuller understanding of the fundamentals of biology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)